Little Women | December 25 2019 | Sony | Greta Gerwig directs | 24th Most Profitable Movie of 2019

[Ithil]

3 hours ago, Noctis said:

This was why the little bitches who focused on one or two tweets saying that Watson was the weakest really needed to shut the fuck up when it came to actual publications. The last two reviews have basically stated that Pugh is the best but the entire cast is excellent. 

 

 

I mean

Quote

A few line readings fall flat — whenever Watson slips out of her American accent, all bets are off 

Quote

Among the large cast, Watson somewhat fades into the background

Quote

I won’t go through all the other players in the ensemble, but most of them inhabit their roles with just the right pep and insight. (Only Watson, as dour eldest sister Meg, runs into some flatness.) 

Quote

 And while Meg gets a few good scenes, she’s still under-served compared with her younger sisters.

 

[Noctis]

15 minutes ago, Ithil said:

I mean

 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

6 hours ago, Ithil said:

I mean

 

Welp...

 

But if this nabs Best Ensemble at the SAG Awards, Emma would get a trophy, too. Being involved in LW is still a big win for her.

Edited November 26, 2019 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[TheDarkKnightOfSteel]

11 hours ago, Ithil said:

I mean

 

Last one is not bad for Emma, it just says that she is underutilized.

[Valonqar]

6 hours ago, BoxOfficeFangrl said:

Welp...

 

But if this nabs Best Ensemble at the SAG Awards, Emma would get a trophy, too. Being involved in LW is still a big win for her.

It's a win because she has Gerwig on her resume and if she behaved well on the set she'd get references and more work. It's not all about reviews for otherwise some really big stars wouldn't even work considering how much beating their movies and performances get or used to.  She's still under 30 and could bounce back like Kstew and RPattz with their indies, arguably actors who received more critical beating than Watson.

 

Also, Meg was always a background character. The story is focused on Jo first and foremost (Louisa May Alcott's self insert) and then Amy and Laurie with aunty being most memorable of background characters. I'm not surprised that Stone dropped out. She probably found a good excuse (scheduling conflict or similar) but Meg March really isn't a role that stars and awards are made of. However, resume is a big deal and Watson has Gerwig on it which many actresses around her age don't.

Edited November 27, 2019 by Valonqar

[SMmadrid90]

On 11/27/2019 at 1:25 AM, Valonqar said:

It's a win because she has Gerwig on her resume and if she behaved well on the set she'd get references and more work. It's not all about reviews for otherwise some really big stars wouldn't even work considering how much beating their movies and performances get or used to.  She's still under 30 and could bounce back like Kstew and RPattz with their indies, arguably actors who received more critical beating than Watson.

 

Also, Meg was always a background character. The story is focused on Jo first and foremost (Louisa May Alcott's self insert) and then Amy and Laurie with aunty being most memorable of background characters. I'm not surprised that Stone dropped out. She probably found a good excuse (scheduling conflict or similar) but Meg March really isn't a role that stars and awards are made of. However, resume is a big deal and Watson has Gerwig on it which many actresses around her age don't.

Jeez the Watson stans here are something else....why are you focusing on her when the reviews are so good for everyone BUT her and Eliza? When a movie is universally praised like this one you should focus on the standouts (Saoirse and Florence) and if this cast wins the SAG award (which i highly doubt) the win would be for EVERYONE, not just one actress . Also i'm sorry but she isn't doing indies anytime soon unless they have big names attached, i follow her career since HP and her MO is only doing movies with a famous director or a prestigious cast and she turns 30 in 5 months, she cannot play the innocent bookworm girl anymore PS: her casting was a last minute decision by Amy Pascal, the producer when Emma Stone dropped out

[Valonqar]

11 hours ago, SMmadrid90 said:

Jeez the Watson stans here are something else....why are you focusing on her when the reviews are so good for everyone BUT her and Eliza? When a movie is universally praised like this one you should focus on the standouts (Saoirse and Florence) and if this cast wins the SAG award (which i highly doubt) the win would be for EVERYONE, not just one actress . Also i'm sorry but she isn't doing indies anytime soon unless they have big names attached, i follow her career since HP and her MO is only doing movies with a famous director or a prestigious cast and she turns 30 in 5 months, she cannot play the innocent bookworm girl anymore PS: her casting was a last minute decision by Amy Pascal, the producer when Emma Stone dropped out

But you said it yourself. We Watson stans are something else and since we are Watson stans why should we focus on other actresses? Now the real question is, why Florence and Luminuous Sersh stans are focusing on Emma Watson? Eh? 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Valonqar

[SMmadrid90]

1 hour ago, Valonqar said:

But you said it yourself. We Watson stans are something else and since we are Watson stans why should we focus on other actresses? Now the real question is, why Florence and Luminuous Sersh stans are focusing on Emma Watson? Eh? 

I don't see Florence and Saoirse stans focusing on her mate, they are just happy that both of them are getting rave reviews and their Oscar nominations are very likely, especially Saoirse

[Valonqar]

then why are you complaining that the conversation shifted to Watson? And for the record, I'm no one's stan. I don't care for actors careers. They are all overpaid for what's essentially a team work that they take sole credit for. I simply pointed out that working with Gerwig is good for Watson resume and that Meg was not an awards role anyway, but if you disagree by all means give arguments instead of playing "stan" card. 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Valonqar

[SMmadrid90]

9 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

then why are you complaining that the conversation shifted to Watson? And for the record, I'm no one's stan. I don't care for actors careers. They are all overpaid for what's essentially a team work that they take sole credit for. I simply pointed out that working with Gerwig is good for Watson resume and that Meg was not an awards role anyway, but if you disagree by all means give arguments instead of playing "stan" card. 

LOL ok

1 hour ago, Valonqar said:

We Watson stans are something else and since we are Watson stans

 

[Valonqar]

Just quoted you, mate. You said it. 

 

it's also called sarcasm. 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Valonqar

[Zakiyyah6]

Watson is not a good actress. Sweet girl though.

[Valonqar]

Ok, serious question. Could Luminous win this year of is Renee too strong? She's been nominated 3 times so far so she's due. I hope she wins before 30. She's 25 now.

 

 

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

1 hour ago, Valonqar said:

Ok, serious question. Could Luminous win this year of is Renee too strong? She's been nominated 3 times so far so she's due. I hope she wins before 30. She's 25 now.

 

 

Is it really the year of Renee? The critics' circles have barely started weighing in and the guilds might go a different way.  True, Judy is a biopic of someone recognizable, succeeding in this genre is apparently the height of acting, according to the Academy .  OTOH, Judy's done fine for the sort of movie it is in 2019, yet Little Women will not only make far more money (which doesn't matter as much to award voters) but is also likely to rack up many more nominations. If you are a voter playing catch-up, you're probably going to watch a screener for something with 9-10 nods (for example) before a movie with a lone acting nomination. That's what did in Close last year, a lot more voters got around to watching The Favourite compared to The Wife.

 

As for Luminosity winning, IDK, the reviews for her are strong so far, yet some are calling others besides Sersh as best in show. It's another young woman coming of age role: will voters want to reward her for Little Women if they feel she was better in Brooklyn or Lady Bird? As you say, she is only 25, that's on the young side for a Best Actress winner, they might not feel a need to reward her just yet. But it really depends on how the competition falls, I think that if ScarJo gets in, she will have more of an "it's her time" narrative to win, even if she's never been nominated before and Saoirse has.

[filmlover]

42 minutes ago, BoxOfficeFangrl said:

Is it really the year of Renee? 

I don't think so. As great as she is in Judy, she's gonna be its only nomination, while Johansson and Ronan are in far stronger movies. Plus she's already an Oscar winner herself. We'll see how the season shapes though.

[Noctis]

11 hours ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

Watson is not a good actress. Sweet girl though.

Have you seen Noah? She was regarded as one of the best in that film. She was excellent in DH1 (as it was Hermione's movie), Perks, and hilarious in Bling Ring.

[Valonqar]

Apparently, being in a stronger movie or a best picture doesn't affect actresses, only actors. the latter win only if they are in a picture nominee, at least recent string of wins had that connection. 

[CoolioD1]

51 minutes ago, Valonqar said:

Apparently, being in a stronger movie or a best picture doesn't affect actresses, only actors. the latter win only if they are in a picture nominee, at least recent string of wins had that connection. 

tell that to glenn close.

[lorddemaxus]

1 hour ago, Noctis said:

Have you seen Noah? She was regarded as one of the best in that film. She was excellent in DH1 (as it was Hermione's movie), Perks, and hilarious in Bling Ring.

I agree with Bling Ring but I thought she was great in it because the characters are meant to feel fake, like wannabe celebrities.

[TheDarkKnightOfSteel]

Sorry can't hear you over all the...